<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2020 (6) TMI 552 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=396177</link>
    <description>Denial of exemption under Notification No. 01/2010-CE could not sustain the duty demand once the earlier appellate order refusing that benefit had been set aside. With the basis for treating the appellant as ineligible no longer in force, the proceedings founded entirely on that denial also failed. The appellant was therefore entitled to the exemption benefit, and the related duty demand was unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 23 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 24 Jun 2020 10:11:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=615842" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (6) TMI 552 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=396177</link>
      <description>Denial of exemption under Notification No. 01/2010-CE could not sustain the duty demand once the earlier appellate order refusing that benefit had been set aside. With the basis for treating the appellant as ineligible no longer in force, the proceedings founded entirely on that denial also failed. The appellant was therefore entitled to the exemption benefit, and the related duty demand was unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=396177</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>